HARDLY HOMIES: Although candidates Das Williams (left) and Mike Stoker are both outspoken, fast on their feet, and like to talk, they were kept on a short leash by forum moderators last Thursday night. Still, their differences shone through.

Article Tools

Das Williams and Mike Stoker will never be confused for Tweedledee and Tweedledum. The two candidates vying for the 35th District Assembly seat in Sacramento — now occupied by Democrat Pedro Nava — offer voters a night-and-day choice on just about everything. At last week’s forum — hosted by the League of Women Voters — Stoker, a self-described “middle of the road” Republican and former county supervisor, presented himself as the wizened political pro “willing to step up to the plate one more time” to help the state in its hour of crisis. If elected, Stoker vowed to cut spending, slash thousands of jobs from the state payroll, and attack “all the stupid regulations” that he blamed for killing four million private jobs since 2000. By contrast, Williams, a member of the Santa Barbara City Council and darling of the Democratic left — promised to find the money to fund education and thus restore the California Dream. Only by investing in education, Williams argued, can the state revitalize its economy, provide hope to the disenfranchised, and offer sustenance to a much-beleaguered middle class. Endowed with an appetite for evangelically tinged rhetoric, Williams proposed raising the necessary funds by increasing the “sin taxes,” the levies imposed by the state on the sale of tobacco and liquor. Williams also proposed raising taxes on oil extraction.

Stylistically, the two are both quick on their feet, like to talk, and not inclined to shy away when push comes to shove. But the rules of engagement imposed by the forum moderators effectively prevented any real fireworks from going off. The candidates were not allowed, for example, to point out how each other may have misstated their respective records or distorted their respective positions. If party registration provides any indication, the race would appear to be Williams’s to lose; the percentage of registered Democrats is 20 percent greater than that of registered Republicans. Democrats have won every race — except one — in the past 10 years with more than 60 percent of the vote. In campaign fundraising, Williams also has the upper hand, having raised $212,000 — mostly from unions long associated with the Democratic Party — in the last reporting period, compared to Stoker’s $96,000.

Stoker is hoping to even the odds by appealing to “Blue Dog Democrats” — fiscally conservative Democrats — socially liberal Republicans who’ve fled their party, and independents. To that end, Stoker’s running TV commercials that don’t mention he’s running as a Republican. He will highlight the extent to which Williams has been a partisan warrior whose campaigns have been heavily funded by public employee unions. And to the degree Williams hopes to benefit from an energized youth vote turning out to support Proposition 19 — the marijuana legalization initiative — Stoker is quick to point out that Williams has opposed Prop. 19, just as he has.

Williams, by contrast, is a formidable campaign organizer able to get out the vote with a rare vengeance. He is hoping to rekindle any of the Obama energy still smoldering out there and can be expected to attack Stoker for representing — as a private attorney — Greka Energy two years ago, when Greka was easily the most extravagant corporate polluter in Santa Barbara County. (Stoker has insisted he helped Greka clean up its environmental transgressions and lamented that “only in politics” could someone be criticized for so doing.) By contrast, Williams represents himself as a champion of green energy and has the voting record at City Hall to back it up.

On the state budget mess, Stoker advocated eliminating 20,000 state jobs, stating, “You wouldn’t notice one thing different in your life.” Williams countered that even with 20,000 jobs cut, the state wouldn’t come close to solving its $19-billion budget deficit. He advocated taxing booze and cigarettes.

On California’s high unemployment, Williams argued the state could help create new jobs by requiring energy companies to buy back the solar power generated by residential producers at prices more comparable to market rates. That would stimulate more homeowners to invest in solar installations, which in turn would help create jobs. Stoker said he supported all jobs, not just green ones, and said California’s environmental rules and regulations were chasing businesses to states like Texas.

On education, Stoker advocated rules that would require that 70 cents of every dollar budgeted for schools be spent in the classroom. Currently, he said, only 57 cents on the dollar makes it there. Likewise, Stoker said schools should be given grades, and students attending those schools with failing marks should be allowed to transfer — at school district expense — to a better school of the parents’ choice. Williams noted that California schools have 30 percent fewer teachers per capita than the national average, 50 percent fewer administrators, and 70 percent fewer counselors. “It’s a hollow thing to say we’ll support education without the revenues to do it,” he said.

On Proposition 23, the statewide initiative that would suspend the state’s 2006 global warming bill until unemployment drops to 5.5 percent for four consecutive quarters, Stoker was an enthusiastic supporter and Williams an adamant opponent. Stoker called the state law “a job killer” and argued, “California can’t do it alone.” Instead, he said, the state should lobby other states to petition for more comprehensive federal legislation. But even so, he argued, the United States would place itself at a competitive disadvantage in the world economy if it were to pass laws limiting greenhouse emissions without similar commitments from India and China. Williams dismissed Stoker’s more comprehensive approach as “an excuse to do nothing.”

Williams supported Proposition 25, which would allow the state Legislature to pass a budget with a simple majority vote as opposed to the two-thirds majority now needed. The status quo, he said, allowed a small minority to “hold the state hostage.” Stoker opposed it, saying it would allow tax increases. Williams countered that the proposed initiative leaves intact the two-thirds majority currently required for the Legislature to raise new taxes.

On immigration, Stoker and Williams both called for better border controls, but Stoker also argued that illegal immigrants convicted of crimes in the United States should be sent back to the country of origin to serve their sentences. By doing so, he said California could save $825 a day per Mexican national now incarcerated in California. By contrast, Williams supported imposing fines “with three zeros” on illegal immigrants in the United States, but also providing them a path to citizenship.

On Measure S, the half-cent sales tax to build a new county jail, Williams was strongly supportive, arguing “it’s not humane” to keep people locked up in such overcrowded conditions. Stoker declined to take a position, but argued that such a tax would not have been necessary had the county supervisors set money aside back in 1994 when he told them they should as he was stepping off the Board of Supervisors.

On an increased oil severance tax, Williams complained that California taxed oil companies “at one-fifth the rate Sarah Palin does in Alaska,” and argued the tax should be increased. Stoker said he’d support such a tax only if California eliminated all the additional fees the state extracted from the oil industry, which is why, he said, California gas prices are the highest in the nation.

More like this story

Comments

They should take a look at the bloated prison budget to balance the State budget. A correctional contract bed saves $22,496 annually and avoids spending $300,000 for construction. They might be surprised (or perhaps not) to learn that California has only 4,500 contract beds compared to over 20,000 in Texas and 33,000 in the Federal prison system. If California had 33,000 contract beds, over $640 million would be saved annually in prison operating costs. $8.5 billion in prison construction costs would be avoided. Contract beds should house “Wobblers” (inmates who can serve their brief terms in jail or prison) and parole violators who now occupy over 48,000 expensive prison beds. I wonder if taxpayers would rather cut essential services than increase the number of contract beds. Someone should ask them.

I'll say one thing, Stoker didn't get it right when he said corporations gave up on defined benefit retirement programs "30 years ago". While pensions aren't nearly as common as they were in the 80's and they are diving in popularity, there are still plenty of companies that have them, including mine.

And Stoker's defense of his tenure with Greka Oil was interesting to watch, he obviously considers that a weak point in his campaign.

I agree with William's views on Prop 13 and his observation that Stoker won't be able to close the budget gap by exempting teachers from layoffs (teacher-related costs contribute to too large a portion of state expenditures, even though they aren't officially state employees - big error on Stoker's part).

Overall, I give that debate to Williams - just more accurate on the details.

Both of these guys represent the choice and that is they are both professional mouthpieces with partisan slant that keeps the gridlock going. It is time to run real people with no affiliation who can see past the ideological nonsense and provide unbiased, non party driven solutions without wedge crack buzz. Aren't you tired of this dog and pony show?

If you want to see more jobs flee the county (and State), if you want to see more of your colleagues be transferred or lose their jobs and houses, if you want to crush small business in SB (have you counted the empty storefronts lately?), then by all means vote Das. That means no jobs for you UCSB grads so go home to mommy & daddy (if they still have room) and know your voted "counted" as another nail in the coffin in the once-great state of CA.

Sorry guys, but I'm not name-calling, just calling out Das for his well-documented behavior. The 'substance' you're looking for can be found every time Das opens his mouth or is quoted in the media. Now if I called him an idiot, a liar, stupid, etc., then THAT would be name-calling. But I didn't.

Rescind Prop 13 and watch rents go through the roof. Renters don't think they pay property taxes but one of the main costs of rental property is the property tax. I would expect single family residences to have rent hikes in the 300-400 dollar range if prop 13 dies.

Also it will be the final nail in the coffin of kalifornia. People will be selling and moving and prices will crash.

Everything that Das is for will hurt the poor and widen the budget gap.

jukin, I think you're way overstating potential rent increases. Consider this. I own a small business. My rent goes up every year according to a SoCal rent index. With one recent exception, my rent has increased at least 3% per year, while the tax my landlord pays has gone up 2% max. I happen to know that the tax on my building is $2800 per year, while my rent is $30,000 per year. Thus the landlord gets a rent increase of nearly $1000 per year while paying a property tax increase increase of $56 per year. Guaranteed large profit increase every year ($1000-$56=$944 increase in profit). This is why business lobbied to be included in Prop 13. Eliminating the Prop 13 break for rental property and assuming the entire amount of the tax increase was passed on would result in rent increase in my case of 2 tenths of 1% per year (0.2% or $56/$30000). Multiple this my all rental properties in CA and the state gets a HUGE infusion of tax revenue to help dig CA out of its financial hole with a very small effect on renters.

So I'm curious as to how you come up with rental increases of $300-$400 per year???

"Now if I called him an idiot, a liar, stupid, etc., then THAT would be name-calling. But I didn't."

Calling someone a liar is not name-calling; calling someone a "Taxin' Jackson clone" is. And so is calling them "big-spending, shape-shifting", which are vague, unsubstantiable terms that serve not rationality but propaganda.

P.S. Here's a reference on name-calling: http://www.propagandacritic.com/artic...and JohnLocke's contribution fits right in. Of course I also referred to his *sloganeering*, so his denial confirms my charge that he is a liar, which is *not* an example of name-calling.

No, truthie, calling someone a Taxin' Jackson clone is not name-calling, it is a shorthand way of comparing the big-spending, tax everything mentality of Das to that of his mentor, the one and only Taxin' Jackson, for whom big government is the solution to all problems and who never met a tax she didn't like. And 'shape-shifting' is a descriptive phrase referring to Das' well-known and constantly publicized tendency to modify his stance to conform to his audience of the moment. Both are easily substantiated, contrary to your statement.

As for 'liar', which is a term loosely used by those who would discredit someone, often without substantiation, I did not use the term, but if I understand the rather convoluted last post, you did call me a liar. Lies deal with matters of fact, not opinion, and your accusations regarding my post are matters of opinion. You simply disagree with my views, which is your right, but hardly makes me a liar.

Hey, anyone read the candidate statements in the sample ballot? Mike Stoker identifies himself as an Independent Small Businessman! Guess that sounds better than a land-use attorney, which he lists as his occupation everywhere else.

Santa Maria Fire Dept. has responded to Greka spills over 400 times since 1999. Stoker's response as Greka's frontman - " we 've taken all the precautions we can". Maybe when Stoker gets the "gub-mint" all shrunk down to where he wants it , he can go out there with a bucket and a scrub brush instead of the 10 firemen left @ S.M.F.D.

Geeber:Stoker was hired as a private attorney to mediate between Greka and the agencies. He was successful. Some 200 private sector jobs were saved. Why should he apologize for that?

By contrast Pedro Nava, the previous Democrat Assemlyman did his level best to kill off the same 200 jobs. Pedro, and his hopeful young apprentice (Das) have ever had real jobs. They have worked in government their entire careers. Taxing, regulation, and job killing is all they know.